Aspectonics: Statics

[crazedrat]

All the potential function progressions are equally classifiable. You have made no case, at all, to show that the one you've chosen (arbitrarily, because you saw it written down somewhere) is any more classifiable than the others. All you have done is stated it is, repeatedly.
Your drawing sucks, too.

What you dont get is that duality is at the heart of socionics, and the functions. Any progression you make will necessarily have an opposite and equally valid progression.

[EyeSeeCold]

I've been looking at the OP for the past half hour in a desperate search for meaning. So far I've yet to find it.

Seriously, it feels like you're making up definitions as you go along. The more I try to read and understand what you're writing the more confused I get and the more my head hurts. Nothing is defined up front, it's like I have to parse what you're trying to say for you, and I don't think I have the ability or the will to do it. What is the 'attraction,' the 'convergence,' the 'distance,' the 'closeness' that I'm supposed to even begin to assume you're talking about?

Those terms mean what they imply. It's just not ordered or explained in the most logical way.

All the potential function progressions are equally classifiable. You have made no case, at all, to show that the one you've chosen (arbitrarily, because you saw it written down somewhere) is any more classifiable than the others. All you have done is stated it is, repeatedly.

The usual Quadra progression has the least subjectivity, at least for the moment.

and are related, true, but the difference is more subjective than progressing towards , which also happens to be a Delta pairing. "It makes sense".

Your drawing sucks, too.

Irrelevant.

What you dont get is that duality is at the heart of socionics, and the functions. Any progression you make will necessarily have an opposite and equally valid progression.

I do get it.

It's not about validity. I understand there are other orders. The usual way explains more than any other progression.

[Korpsy Knievel]

Those terms mean what they imply.

Denote, don't connote, otherwise readers are forced to wonder at or assume meaning. Parity between what's implied and what's inferred is often piss poor. Your vocabulary isn't lacking but you've got a penchant for leaving terms poorly defined when you trot out these exercises in semantic algebra.